I disagree, there were worthwhile games even before November-December, but biggest games of year were November-December, but that doesnt mean year was bad at end.

Point that 2019. look it will be much stronger than 2018. also doesnt mean that 2018. was bad.

Again disagree, Switch didn't had any droughts and despite didn't had huge exclusive games until years end, there were plenty of and different type of releases games.

Not only it could ride on those games, it had to.

But when you see people question Nintendo's 20M goal for the fiscal year, you realise that riding on those games wasn't enough. And is exactly the problem: it could - and should - have been better and it wasn't.
The potential was there.

There's a reason why games like Kirby and Yoshi aren't usually used to lift sales or aren't holiday titles. It's because they are "fillers". And i don't say this in a bad way.
A Smash game can handle a lack of big games, but Kirby, Yoshi can't. And that's why trying to support your system's growth on such games is a "bad" move.

I'm not saying, with this, that they aren't valuable games or that they don't have a place of their own. I'm just saying that either they should have the company of system sellers or should have been reserved for a later time (sustain sales, for exemple).

I'm not saying games like Kirby or Mario Tennis aren't worthwhile or that they aren't valuable entries in the Switch library. I'm merely saying that, for a console in a second year, having 10 months of titles like these is a bad move.
Remember that this was the plan even before Switch was a hit. Which means that hadn't Switch sold as it did and things wouldn't be "ok".

When i say that 2018 is bad i do it because we are talking about a console in it's second year. Not fourth or fifth.
This lack of system sellers in a year, to catapult sales, was not a good move.
And unlike Sony and MS, Nintendo does not have 3rd parties to cover their flaws.

Again, it's not a question of droughts - which never happened -, it's just about answering this question: how well did Nintendo managed their second year to increase sales futher in the year and beyond?
The answer, to me, is that they did a bad management of releases and 2018 suffered.

2017 was an excellent year in terms of mid-great titles; 2018 wasn't; 2019 is shaping up to be what 2018 should have been, not just for Switch, but for any console.

Wii U in 2014 (it's second full year) had a better planned release Schedule:
DKC Tropical Freeze (February)
MK 8 (May)
Hyrule Warriors (September)
Bayonetta 2 (October)
Captain Toad (Nov./Dec.)
Smash (December).

Even compared to Wii U's 2014, Switch 2018 looks bad.

Idk if it will beat DS too, but outselling Wii lifetime is becoming easier and easier for NS, even if it will not reach the best predictions for 2018.

Thats not how it works, plans do change and things dont go always like its planed, they planed some games for 2018. that didnt finished on time, Yoshi and Fire Emblem are obvious examples.

But point is that Switch had killer 1st year, so its hard to have again so strong second year also, big games need time to be developed and they couldn't developed big games before end of 2018. Also, Pokemon and Smash Bros are 2nd year games, there is no reason to pretend like they are not part of second year despite they are released at end of year. Actually 3rd party games did cover Switch in some degree this year also, Fortnite is one obvious example.

2018. could be better offcourse (but any year could be better or worse), but that doesn't mean that 2018. is bad year for Switch at end, because its not.

I dont say that 2018. was great year, I just saying itsnt bad either, it was OK year at end.

Wii U didnt had bad 2nd year also, but thats why 1st year was terrible, Switch 1st year destroys Wii Us 1st year. Also if you comparing 2nd Switch year, this is Switch 2018. year if we talk about 1st party and exclusive games:

-Bayonetta 1/2 (February)
-Kirby Star Allies (March)
-Nintendo Labo Toy-Con 01/02 (April)
-Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze (May)
-Hyrule Warriors (May)
-Pokémon Quest (May)
-Sushi Striker: The Way of Sushido (June)
-Mario Tennis Aces (June)
-Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker (July)
-Octopath Traveler (July)
-Go Vacation (July)
-Nintendo Labo - Toy-Con 03 (September)
-Xenoblade Chronicles 2: Torna – The Golden Country (September)
-Super Mario Party (October)
-The World Ends with You: Final Remix (October)
-Pokémon: Let's Go (November)
-Smash Bros Ultimate (December)

Switch lacked one big game in first half of year (IMO Nintendo thought Labo will be big game), but outside that, it was OK year with plenty of different type of releases.

2019 is definitely looking to be a good year, probably going to pass the 100 games owned mark before the system is even 2 years.

Yes, things don't go as plan.
It took, Nintendo, 3 years to develop NSMB U. A game that is basically the Wii version with slightly better graphics. Imagine what it did to the rest of it's lineup, and you'll get a better idea why Wii U's lineup was weak from day 1.

But that meant - and means - that Nintendo didn't prepare for a new generation and the same is valid for Switch: if you know you are going to frontload your console in it's first year, with Mario, MK, Zelda, Splatoon and even Xenoblade, then you better have a really good plan for the second year.
Turns out that Nintendo only had plans for the last quarter (see, i didn't forget about them!).

The difference between Wii U and Switch, in it's second year, is that despite everything, Wii U had a better balanced out year than Switch.
Wii U managed to have great games throughout the year, whereas Switch had them all in the last 45 days of 2018.

I'm not even gonna argue about quantity. It's obvious that Switch wins…. anything beats Wii U in that respect!

And this is why i said 2018 was a bad year: poor management of releases.
And they have no escuses for this: HD development was not the hurdle it once was; 3DS development in-house pretty much finished in late 2014 or early 2015 with Wii U following suite; deliberately frontloading Switch in it's first year.

You may not agree - and you probably won't - but this is how i see it.
To me, if Wii U could deliver a more balanced year, then Switch (a console that doesn't have to share resources with a handheld, unlike Wii U) should have done better!

The OP to this thread "gets it". Switch has been slow playing it so far. I mean, there were some really good first party games that came out 2017-2018, but there are just a lot more games coming out in 2019, especially third party games. And 2020 is going to be even stronger than 2019.

Lots of third party companies have been toiling away, making third party games for the past couple of years. Companies understandably didn't start making their games until after they saw the Switch was going to be successful. But just getting a little while into 2017, it was pretty clear that Switch was going to be a success. So, then third party companies needed 2-3 years to actually make their games for the Switch. That means 2019 will have a ton of third party games and 2020 will have even more.

A flood of games is coming to Switch, just wait and see.

Things are looking good for 2019 for the Switch. There's some titles I'm really interested in, like Marvel Ultimate Alliance 3, Luigi's Mansion 3, Tales of Vesperia, Daemon X Machina, Dragon Quest Builders 2, Pokemon, and the title I'm most excited for: Fire Emblem: Three Houses. Definitel can't wait for that.

Those games would be enough to keep me occupied for next year.

I wrote "filler" and not just filler, because i didn't want you to take it literally.
Of course those games have value, but they sell to people who already own a console and not a console to those who don't have it. And that's where Nintendo failed in 2018.

Momentum of a console is specially drive by system sellers. That's why games like Pokémon, Mario, Mk, etc, are so important for Nintendo. And when things go south (Wii U), those are the titles that help Nintendo fight.

Again, it's great that Nintendo has these type of titles, but to actually succeeded, they just don't cut it.

Honestly, i don't think that more of these titles would have made a big difference. In perception? Probably a little bit (more is always better), but for overall sales, i doubt it. Not to mention how bad it would be for the later years when all those IPs had used up their usual userbase.

Great list.
Have to be honest, comparing both lists are like comparing day and night. (with 2019 being the day of course)